Peter Mukerjea’s lawyer says investigation agency has no evidence against him.
Mumbai: The special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court will frame charges against Indrani Mukerjea, her husband Peter Mukerjea and ex-husband Sanjeev Khanna on January 17 in the case involving the murder of her daughter Sheena Bora in April 2012. The trio was chargesheeted by the CBI in the case. Indrani was accused of plotting and executing Sheena’s murder along with Khanna.
On Wednesday, the defence completed its arguments related to framing of charges. While arguing, Peter’s lawyer said that charges like forgery, cheating and attempt to murder does not apply to his client because the CBI has no concrete evidence against him. Peter was accused of being part of the conspiracy on the basis of his telephonic conversations with Indrani during the period the latter allegedly carried out the murder and then disposed off the body in Raigad.
Mihir Gheewala, who represents Peter, argued that there was no material on record and no charges were made out against the latter under section 307 (attempt to murder), 328 (causing hurt by means of poison), 420 (Cheating) and section 468(forgery) of the Indian Penal Code. He further argued that the CBI had went through various emails and tried to built a case against Peter. He said the CBI had not established why Peter wanted to kill Mikhail. He also argued that there was no post-murder communication between Peter and Indrani. He further said that when the murder had happened, Peter was out of country so Section 307 could not be applied to him.
Mr Gheewala, submitting that the case against Peter is vague, argued that mails were exchanged between Khanna and Sheena, but Peter’s name had never appeared in them and they had not mentioned him in the CC section of email. However, Indrani’s lawyer Gunjan Mangla, said that Section 66(A) of the Information and Technologies Act did not apply to her client because in 2016 the apex court had set aside this section, terming it unconstitutional.
Meanwhile, advocate Niranjan Mundragi, Khanna’s lawyer argued that sections related to cheating and forgery did not apply to his client. After hearing the arguments, Justice H.S. Mahajan kept the matter for framing of charges on January 17. After the framing of charges, the prosecution will call witnesses to depose before the court.
After that, arguments on the forensic report that established Sheena’s death will be heard. Later, final arguments will be heard and that court will ask the accused, under Section 313 of the CrPC, whether they have anything to say on the evidence. Finally, the judge will dictate his judgment in the case.